cording to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Revised Third Edition, criteria; and (3) either. Results: Of 393 eligible patients, 243 (62%) completed AUDIT-C and interviews. For detecting heavy drinking, AUDIT-C had a higher AUROC than the full AUDIT (0.891 vs 0.881; P = .03). Although the full AUDIT performed better than AUDIT-C for detecting active alcohol abuse or dependence (0.811 vs 0.786; P<.001), the 2 questionnaires performed similarly for detecting heavy drinking and/or active abuse or dependence (0.880 vs 0.881).

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articlepdf/208954/ioi70602.pdf

The AUDIT Alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C) : An effective brief screening test for problem drinking

OBJECTIVES: To consider methods and related evidence for evaluating bias in non-randomised intervention studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews and methodological papers were identified from a search of electronic databases; handsearches of key medical journals and contact with experts working in the field. New empirical studies were conducted using data from two large randomised clinical trials. METHODS: Three systematic reviews and new empirical investigations were conducted. The reviews considered, in regard to non-randomised studies, (1) the existing evidence of bias, (2) the content of quality assessment tools, (3) the ways that study quality has been assessed and addressed. (4) The empirical investigations were conducted generating non-randomised studies from two large, multicentre randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and selectively resampling trial participants according to allocated treatment, centre and period. RESULTS: In the systematic reviews, eight studies compared results of randomised and non-randomised studies across multiple interventions using meta-epidemiological techniques. A total of 194 tools were identified that could be or had been used to assess non-randomised studies. Sixty tools covered at least five of six pre-specified internal validity domains. Fourteen tools covered three of four core items of particular importance for non-randomised studies. Six tools were thought suitable for use in systematic reviews. Of 511 systematic reviews that included non-randomised studies, only 169 (33%) assessed study quality. Sixty-nine reviews investigated the impact of quality on study results in a quantitative manner. The new empirical studies estimated the bias associated with non-random allocation and found that the bias could lead to consistent over- or underestimations of treatment effects, also the bias increased variation in results for both historical and concurrent controls, owing to haphazard differences in case-mix between groups. The biases were large enough to lead studies falsely to conclude significant findings of benefit or harm. Four strategies for case-mix adjustment were evaluated: none adequately adjusted for bias in historically and concurrently controlled studies. Logistic regression on average increased bias. Propensity score methods performed better, but were not satisfactory in most situations. Detailed investigation revealed that adequate adjustment can only be achieved in the unrealistic situation when selection depends on a single factor. CONCLUSIONS: Results of non-randomised studies sometimes, but not always, differ from results of randomised studies of the same intervention. Non-randomised studies may still give seriously misleading results when treated and control groups appear similar in key prognostic factors. Standard methods of case-mix adjustment do not guarantee removal of bias. Residual confounding may be high even when good prognostic data are available, and in some situations adjusted results may appear more biased than unadjusted results. Although many quality assessment tools exist and have been used for appraising non-randomised studies, most omit key quality domains. Healthcare policies based upon non-randomised studies or systematic reviews of non-randomised studies may need re-evaluation if the uncertainty in the true evidence base was not fully appreciated when policies were made. The inability of case-mix adjustment methods to compensate for selection bias and our inability to identify non-randomised studies that are free of selection bias indicate that non-randomised studies should only be undertaken when RCTs are infeasible or unethical. Recommendations for further research include: applying the resampling methodology in other clinical areas to ascertain whether the biases described are typical; developing or refining existing quality assessment tools for non-randomised studies; investigating how quality assessments of non-randomised studies can be incorporated into reviews and the implications of individual quality features for interpretation of a review's results; examination of the reasons for the apparent failure of case-mix adjustment methods; and further evaluation of the role of the propensity score.

/pdf/evaluating-non-randomised-intervention-studies-2k25cz7x6r.pdf

Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.

Background Motivational Interviewing is a well-known, scientifically tested method of counselling clients developed by Miller and Rollnick and viewed as a useful intervention strategy in the treatment of lifestyle problems and disease.

Aim To evaluate the effectiveness of motivational interviewing in different areas of disease and to identify factors shaping outcomes.

Design of study A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials using motivational interviewing as the intervention.

Method After selection criteria a systematic literature search in 16 databases produced 72 randomised controlled trials the first of which was published in 1991. A quality assessment was made with a validated scale. A meta-analysis was performed as a generic inverse variance meta-analysis.

Results Meta-analysis showed a significant effect (95% confidence interval) for motivational interviewing for combined effect estimates for body mass index, total blood cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, blood alcohol concentration and standard ethanol content, while combined effect estimates for cigarettes per day and for HbA1c were not significant. Motivational interviewing had a significant and clinically relevant effect in approximately three out of four studies, with an equal effect on physiological (72%) and psychological (75%) diseases. Psychologists and physicians obtained an effect in approximately 80% of the studies, while other healthcare providers obtained an effect in 46% of the studies. When using motivational interviewing in brief encounters of 15 minutes, 64% of the studies showed an effect. More than one encounter with the patient ensures the effectiveness of motivational interviewing.

Conclusion Motivational interviewing in a scientific setting outperforms traditional advice giving in the treatment of a broad range of behavioural problems and diseases. Large-scale studies are now needed to prove that motivational interviewing can be implemented into daily clinical work in primary and secondary health care.

Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Preface All individuals exist in social, political, historical, and economic contexts, and psychologists are increasingly called upon to understand the influence of these contexts on individuals’ behavior. The “Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists” reflect the continuing evolution of the study of psychology, changes in society at large, and emerging data about the different needs of particular individuals and groups historically marginalized or disenfranchised within and by psychology based on their ethnic/racial heritage and social group identity or membership. These “Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists” reflect knowledge and skills needed for the profession in the midst of dramatic historic sociopolitical changes in U.S. society, as well as needs of new constituencies, markets, and clients. The specific goals of these guidelines are to provide psychologists with (a) the rationale and needs for addressing multiculturalism and diversity in education, training, research, practice, and organizational change; (b) basic information, relevant terminology, current empirical research from psychology and related disciplines, and other data that support the proposed guidelines and underscore their importance; (c) references to enhance ongoing education, training, research, practice, and organizational change methodologies; and (d) paradigms that broaden the purview of psychology as a profession.

Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(05)17870-2.pdf

Alcohol and public health

Relatively brief interventions have consistently been found to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption or achieving treatment referral of problem drinkers. To date, the literature includes at least a dozen randomized trials of brief referral or retention procedures, and 32 controlled studies of brief interventions targeting drinking behavior, enrolling over 6000 problem drinkers in both health care and treatment settings across 14 nations. These studies indicate that brief interventions are more effective than no counseling, and often as effective as more extensive treatment. The outcome literature is reviewed, and common motivational elements of effective brief interventions are described. There is encouraging evidence that the course of harmful alcohol use can be effectively altered by well-designed intervention strategies which are feasible within relatively brief-contact contexts such as primary health care settings and employee assistance programs. Implications for future research and practice are considered.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb00820.x

Brief interventions for alcohol problems: a review

To investigate the impact of counselor style, a 2-session motivational checkup was offered to 42 problem drinkers (18 women and 24 men) who were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (a) immediate checkup with directive-confrontational counseling, (b) immediate checkup with client-centered counseling, or (c) delayed checkup (waiting-list control). Overall, the intervention resulted in a 57% reduction in drinking within 6 weeks, which was maintained at 1 year. Clients receiving immediate checkup showed significant reduction in drinking relative to controls. The 2 counseling styles were discriminable on therapist behaviors coded from audiotapes. The directive-confrontational style yielded significantly more resistance from clients, which in turn predicted poorer outcomes at 1 year. Therapist styles did not differ in overall impact on drinking, but a single therapist behavior was predictive (r = .65) of 1-year outcome such that the more the therapist confronted, the more the client drank.

Enhancing motivation for change in problem drinking: A controlled comparison of two therapist styles.

What works? A methodological analysis of the alcohol treatment outcome literature.

Objective: Reviews of research on Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) have speculated how findings may differ when grouped by client and study characteristics. A meta-analytic review by Emrick et al. in 1993 provided empirical support for this concern but did not explore its implications. This review divided results of AA affiliation and outcome research by sample origin and global rating of study quality. The review also examined the statistical power of studies on AA. Method: Meta-analytic procedures were used to summarize the findings of 74 studies that examined AA affiliation and outcome. Results were divided by whether samples were drawn from outpatient or inpatient settings and a global rating of study quality that jointly considered use of subject selection and assignment, reliability of measurement and corroboration of self-report. Efficacy of dividing study results was examined by changes in magnitude of correlations and unexplained variance. Results: AA participation and drinking outcomes were more strong...

Meta-analysis of the literature on Alcoholics Anonymous: sample and study characteristics moderate findings.

Objective: Project MATCH is a randomized clinical trial consisting of five outpatient and five aftercare units at nine sites. Of importance in this multisite trial examining the efficacy of client-treatment matching was the cross- and within-site reliability of the structured interview used to assess alcohol treatment outcomes, the Form 90. Evaluation of the reliability of Form 90 is the subject of this article. Method: The reliability of Form 90 was evaluated in two test-retest studies. The cross-site reliability study consisted of 70 paired test-retest interviews conducted by different interviewers. Clients for this study were recruited from inpatient, outpatient and college settings. The within-site reliability study had a total of 108 paired test-retest interviews, with 54 of the retests conducted by different interviewers and 54 by the same interviewer. Clients for this study were most often presenting for alcohol treatment at the nine sites and were selected to be representative of the larger Projec...

/pdf/the-reliability-of-form-90-an-instrument-for-assessing-3nhk9chb3q.pdf

J. S. Tonigan

Papers

Brief interventions for alcohol problems: a review

Enhancing motivation for change in problem drinking: A controlled comparison of two therapist styles.

What works? A methodological analysis of the alcohol treatment outcome literature.

Meta-analysis of the literature on Alcoholics Anonymous: sample and study characteristics moderate findings.

The reliability of Form 90: an instrument for assessing alcohol treatment outcome.